decentralised

This is just. If a president can pardon people preemptively then they can pardon someone retroactively as well.

The easiest way to realise this is to imagine a clock without the minute hand.

No need to imagine it, it's been invented many years ago and it's called a perigraph. Meistersinger makes one of the nicest I've seen: https://www.relogios.pt/meistersinger-perigraph-relogio-auto...

Actually... the account model is much easier to use to get an accurate view of all balances than the UTXO model. As for rollbacks, Bitcoin had one in 2010 (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Value_overflow_incident) and a chain fork in 2013 (https://bitcoin.org/en/alert/2013-03-11-chain-fork) both decided by those who could make the decision... and accepted by a majority of nodes, same as with the ETH hard fork

I'm not so sure about understandability at protocol level, I do believe Ethereum to be straightforward but then again I've followed its progress over the years

The traceability of very much part of design of most blockchains, starting with Bitcoin. The whitepaper makes this clear in section "10) Privacy" and the article quotes half of the relevant text.

The remaining half states: "As an additional firewall, a new key pair should be used for each transaction to keep them from being linked to a common owner. Some linking is still unavoidable with multi-input transactions, which necessarily reveal that their inputs were owned by the same owner. The risk is that if the owner of a key is revealed, linking could reveal other transactions that belonged to the same owner"

Unlike Bitcoin, account based blockchains make this extra measure of privacy harder as the receiving and sending address is one and the same, however there's no limit to how many accounts one can have, so anonymity is still possible as long as acquiring the coins doesn't reveal your identity.

Those who sign up for cryptocurrency service providers (who are required by law to perform AML/KYC checks - and do so with the consent of their customers) trade away the privacy (of some of their) transactions for the benefits (most commonly, yield and ease of use) said services offer. This is not different from use cases of cash money, where getting cash money from an ATM or most money transmitters will reveal your identity, and while one is free to make in person transactions and remain "anonymous", if one wants to have a bank account or invest legally, then some level of KYC will be in place.

The article indeed asks the wrong question. DeFi can't operate legally without KYC/AML and customers know it. Your comment on the other hand seems to me to be making an error in believing DeFi users don't know this.

The "bug" is that some developers think of matching function signatures as some form of authN / authZ.

A few years back I wrote https://medium.com/coinmonks/lashing-out-at-a-spank-channel-... about a similar hack where a contract "trusted" a given (user input) contract based on nothing other than verifying a function signature. This latest hack was smarter but ultimately it still exploited a 4 bytes hash "security" feature...

Another aspect of this is 51% attacks are recoverable for PoW, but are a permanent takeover condition for PoS networks. If a single entity ever accumulates more than half the tokens on a PoS network, they are unassailable.

This is not true. PoS has many design flavours and the one Ethereum is planning on implementing includes random selection of validators and the amount staked has no influence on the inclusion or the vote "weight".

Also with PoS an attacker will always incur economic losses similar to having your mining rig burning down if you were to try to foce a bad block through. In PoW networks attackers can keep on mixing attacks with producing normal blocks and remain profitable

cmd + k to clear the terminal

We use a similar word in Portuguese: nim (n for nao/ no and im for sim/yes)

I think the parseInt example is more of a gotcha of point-free syntax. Normally it would be written as ['1','7','11'].map(e => parseInt(e))

Mind you that a tx in the mempool has not yet produced any changes to state. In BTC you can also replace-by-fee for instance (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_replacement).

This page (https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Design-Rationale) contains a good overview of the UTXO vs Account model with each's strengths and weaknesses.

I wonder if the self-deprecation might be a corporate branding thing? In Portugal a couple of years back there was a "marketing war" where one retailer's message went something like: "smart people buy with us" while Lidl's ads expressed something like "you don't have to be smart to buy at Lidl".

Most of what I know I picked up by looking at AMM vendor websites and papers as well as attending industry conferences and talking with the people there.

You're new to this :-)

Look all cryptos are extremely volatile because the real market liquidity is an order of magnitude less than most people think it is, and the way automated market makers work force all exchanges to keep their prices "in sync" to avoid arbitrage like we had in the early days when it was possible to buy for 50$ in one exchange and sell for 100$ in another..

On the plus side, atm BTC is up ~8% in the last year and about ~22% since the beginning of the month.

Source: me a blockchain dev, former CTO of a crypto exchange that raised 30M in an ICO.

Watching you video now, really cool to learn about Quokka, thanks!

Just curious but have you tried Hegel (https://hegel.js.org/)?

I've only just started playing with it but it already feels superior to Typescript (for my needs)

For now the combo of a Rust backend with native TypeScript support means that type safety can be expected (but not enforced) and disabling access to net and system by default does improve on Node's behaviour and reduces the risk of importing a module that takes over the host system.

This is tempting... but now my question is: what will Deno do or have that will make those who've invested years in Node consider switching?

FWIW, 4GL is from the 70s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth-generation_programming_...

(my favourite: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Informix-4GL)

Great resource, thank you for building it!

I figured it would be ok since it's been over 6 months since it was last posted and I only found out about it today :-)

I've been looking into streams in detail recently because I'm preparing for the OpenJSF exam... maybe this is relevant to you too: https://nodejs.org/es/docs/guides/backpressuring-in-streams/

Well, first of all thank you for your earlier comment.

My anxiety is peaking lately... I have no idea exactly why I answered like that but what I meant was that while I'm not familiar with the US payment system, I do know the European one quite well and that's why earlier I'd expressed incredulity that any traditional banking system could offer zero cost transfers. I think I didn't notice you were not JumpCrisscross

Im in the EU and we don't have Fedwire here. I can tell you that ABN AMRO charges me ~10 euros for transferring ~200 eur to the UK (with conversion to GBP).

Generally speaking I'm quite familiar with payment infra in Europe, I've worked on it for ~20 years after all.

Not familiar with Fedwire. Surely it won't be free to move fiat via any payment network.

Do you happen to have a source? PS: seems not to be available to retail customers?

The costs for transactions are not fixed to a percentage of the total amount sent but on the size of the transaction and the network congestion.

Moving one billion USD worth of BTC can cost as little as 0.065 BTC or ~440 USD.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/ne...

https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/4410c8d14ff9f87ceeed1d65cb...

I believe JS is lexically scoped... but it is in fact the most misunderstood language in the world.

https://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/5.1/#sec-10.2 https://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/5.1/#sec-13.2

https://2ality.com/2011/04/ecmascript-5-spec-lexicalenvironm...

The actions of professional traders affect retail investors, companies and trust in markets as a whole.

If price discovery and liquidity where solved problems, then of course a crypto-like model of 24*7 no holds trading would be a nice to have but the truth is very different here..

It doesn't work just fine at all. I could tell you plenty of stories and industry insights but I'll leave you just with one nugget I got at a market-maker conference last year: not even 20 cryptoexchanges are profitable, and this information comes from those who are paid to make markets.. move.

edit: I think maybe you were referring to ForEx currencies only.. well, there's a difference between a broker and an exchange and I'm constantly surprised traders don't know this.

PS: I worked at Euronext too (many years ago)

It's the same thing as not having circuit breakers really. The closing hours allow regulated markets to be more efficient imho

Mmmh... I was a CTO at a crypto-exchange which as everyone knows don't have circuit breakers.

The amount of emails we received from customers complaining they lost a lot of money while they were asleep was part of the reason I left, and now also part of the reason I think whichever traders WSJ interviewed (can't see article bc it's paywalled) are wrong.

In my formal education days, I was perma-frustrated that none of my teachers had achieved anything impressive with their work (apart from being published), and I often felt like I was being handed out second-hand knowledge to regurgitate during the exams... and I had to get a job to pay for that level of education!

To me what's really good about MOOCs is that I can have access to some of the best content and teachers from MIT, etc all from the comfort of my living room.